"im actually really hoping, and banking on their laziness, that they wont write a script (i dont have other teams in violation, but others do). but if you have a DB of customers (how can you not? but who knows, maybe they manage to find a way), its absolutely trivial to do a lookup on fields. IP isnt the best, but billing address and name would be a good start."

colonels19 says...

I just want to go on record as saying that I almost never give WIS the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like this...I feel they're kind of "seat of the pants" about a lot of stuff.

"im actually really hoping, and banking on their laziness, that they wont write a script (i dont have other teams in violation, but others do). but if you have a DB of customers (how can you not? but who knows, maybe they manage to find a way), its absolutely trivial to do a lookup on fields. IP isnt the best, but billing address and name would be a good start."

colonels19 says...

I just want to go on record as saying that I almost never give WIS the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like this...I feel they're kind of "seat of the pants" about a lot of stuff.

billy_g,

Your script would have to take into account that 1 public IP address is used by many businesses who have private networks behind their firewall.

The US Navy has several thousand machines behind two small external IP ranges on opposite coasts of the US (or they did a couple of years ago). It would be quite easy for 2 people in that environment from different states to have the same IP address that connected to the site within a couple of minutes of each other.

Most colleges do this as well. A very small range (maybe even one) external IP address(es) and a whole bunch of 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x or 172.16-31.x.x on their private networks.

Many businesses do this as well ... my previous employer had several branch offices of up to 100 people all use one external IP address at each office to connect to the Internet.

Many apartment complexes do this as well ... Even most houses now have more than one device connected to a router with multiple private IP addresses on the inside and one external IP. I routinely have 5 people using 8 or 9 devices inside my house capable of browsing the Internet. In this case, I am the only one who plays WIS games .. but many users might connect from their parents house, etc.

You can fairly easily come up with a list of usernames that connect from the same IP address, but then how long would it take to validate that list ... and other than asking the user and having them tell you (and if they are cheating, then they will lie), how do you know that userid1 and userid2 are the same person?

"im actually really hoping, and banking on their laziness, that they wont write a script (i dont have other teams in violation, but others do). but if you have a DB of customers (how can you not? but who knows, maybe they manage to find a way), its absolutely trivial to do a lookup on fields. IP isnt the best, but billing address and name would be a good start."

colonels19 says...

I just want to go on record as saying that I almost never give WIS the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like this...I feel they're kind of "seat of the pants" about a lot of stuff.

billy_g,

Your script would have to take into account that 1 public IP address is used by many businesses who have private networks behind their firewall.

The US Navy has several thousand machines behind two small external IP ranges on opposite coasts of the US (or they did a couple of years ago). It would be quite easy for 2 people in that environment from different states to have the same IP address that connected to the site within a couple of minutes of each other.

Most colleges do this as well. A very small range (maybe even one) external IP address(es) and a whole bunch of 192.168.x.x or 10.x.x.x or 172.16-31.x.x on their private networks.

Many businesses do this as well ... my previous employer had several branch offices of up to 100 people all use one external IP address at each office to connect to the Internet.

Many apartment complexes do this as well ... Even most houses now have more than one device connected to a router with multiple private IP addresses on the inside and one external IP. I routinely have 5 people using 8 or 9 devices inside my house capable of browsing the Internet. In this case, I am the only one who plays WIS games .. but many users might connect from their parents house, etc.

You can fairly easily come up with a list of usernames that connect from the same IP address, but then how long would it take to validate that list ... and other than asking the user and having them tell you (and if they are cheating, then they will lie), how do you know that userid1 and userid2 are the same person?

not sure if you saw the part of the post where i said, IP isnt the best, but billing address and name would be a good start. the reason i said it wasnt the best is partly what you describe, but also because its so easy to spoof IPs, or even to use multiple IPs on the same computer, one for some applications, and the other, for others. more than those issues, is that IP is not usually stored in a DB table, and if it is, its most recent, which presents a whole host of issues with multiple devices being used (a phone and a computer, for example). but usually to scan IP of connections, you get down into web logs, its much messier. i would be looking for the quick & ditry, a simple query against a database table, where name and address are usually pretty common. there are problems there, too, but with people concerned about intentional abuse of 2 teams, having 2 people in the same home is *just* as easy to intentionally abuse, so why wouldnt the same restrictions hold?

im definitely not arguing family members shouldnt be allowed to play in the same world or same conference, i just dont see a difference, if you are trying to restrict intentional cheating, between 2 people in a house with 2 IDs, or 1 person with 2 IDs. if unintentional cheating is the issue we are trying to prevent, which i can get behind (i cant at all get behind the arguments in any of these threads pertaining to intentional cheating, because you only stop those trying to be transparent, not anyone with half a brain intentionally abusing) - then i would think no restrictions would be needed for different people in the same house, while lesser restrictions than those in place today would need to be placed on individuals with 2 teams.

just FYI hughes, the multiple people in an apartment issue is less of a technical issue than you think. think about it like this - you send a packet, and it HAS to be able to get back to you. ALL the information needed to make that possible, HAS to be in the packet you send. besides, you dont have the same IP as anyone else in the apartment, that isnt allowed. rather, your IP would be something like 192.168.0.2, while my IP (if i lived above you) might be 192.168.0.3. these are private, not externally routable IP addresses. so, you cant send a packet to WIS saying "hey this is from 192.168.0.1", because nobody knows what the hell that means (except on your LAN). so, your router will look and go, ok, i'm 1.2.3.4, ill send this packet to WIS from 1.2.3.4 port 5000, while coach_billyg's packet is sent from 1.2.3.4 port 5001. there are more sophisticated ways these things can be handled but thats the simplest way i know to explain it. generally, traffic is not going to be coming back to different ports for the same user, so its not difficult in the event of multiple IPs, to check the return port, and go hmm, there must be 2 guys there, CBG and hughes.

Can they not do it credit card? Although would guess the more successful coaches play free. Still think collusion, which BillyG strongly referenced in the filet post in this thread is a far bigger problem than multiple aliases. When a few teams divide the choice recruits up, and help each other out by targeting any coach that lands on one of "their" recruits, that makes the game a lot less fun for everyone else. We all know it is going on, and have our usual suspects in mind, but it is hard to prove if the guys are not dumb enough to use site mail.
TL

Posted by tedlukacs on 4/30/2013 5:24:00 PM (view original):Can they not do it credit card? Although would guess the more successful coaches play free. Still think collusion, which BillyG strongly referenced in the filet post in this thread is a far bigger problem than multiple aliases. When a few teams divide the choice recruits up, and help each other out by targeting any coach that lands on one of "their" recruits, that makes the game a lot less fun for everyone else. We all know it is going on, and have our usual suspects in mind, but it is hard to prove if the guys are not dumb enough to use site mail.
TL

credit card is the first line of thinking, but you arent allowed to store credit cards in a database without all kinds of rules and regulations. i really doubt WIS keeps our credit cards around - at least, if they do, i doubt management knows about it.

plus, people have multiple cards all the time, but usually the name (less middle initial) and address (maybe less abbreviation at the end, st vs street) are usually the same. so to me, thats the easiest place to start.

The question is, how would HD find out, unless somebody ratted? We are back to Square One, and still believe collusion is a far worse problem. Know a couple of coaches that have been approached about colluding against another coach by involving him in multiple recruiting battles.

The question is, how would HD find out, unless somebody ratted? We are back to Square One, and still believe collusion is a far worse problem. Know a couple of coaches that have been approached about colluding against another coach by involving him in multiple recruiting battles.

who is this responding to? me or metsmax's suggestion?

i agree collusion is way worse. i was approached by people all over the place to collude, when i was new to d1 (in tark) and started tearing it up. once i became known for being outspoken against collusion, it mostly stopped, but it pretty much blew me away to be getting a request a season MINIMUM at the time. some was more innocent ****, like, hey i really like player X and i dont think you really want him, that hes really a backup, and i dont want to fight you if you really want him (from a little mid major who couldnt compete). then to some bigger ones like hey, im new to the big 6 school near your big 6 school, its clearly in our best interest not to fight. why dont you tell me who you want so i can steer clear? (with a suggestion that we make the arrangement long term).

its pretty sad, really, but i like to sit in my bubble and pretend it doesnt happen.

anyway, on the how would HD find out, if they have a DB of names and addresses, they could run a check on that pretty easily (not that i want them to or will suggest to seble that they do it - just hypothetically), and have a temp (or the retarded CS drone mentioned in dac's thread about who is the idiot) cross check with the list of reported aliases. i would support making that list include people playing in the same house, or on the same card, to make it clearer.

The question is, how would HD find out, unless somebody ratted? We are back to Square One, and still believe collusion is a far worse problem. Know a couple of coaches that have been approached about colluding against another coach by involving him in multiple recruiting battles.

who is this responding to? me or metsmax's suggestion?

i agree collusion is way worse. i was approached by people all over the place to collude, when i was new to d1 (in tark) and started tearing it up. once i became known for being outspoken against collusion, it mostly stopped, but it pretty much blew me away to be getting a request a season MINIMUM at the time. some was more innocent ****, like, hey i really like player X and i dont think you really want him, that hes really a backup, and i dont want to fight you if you really want him (from a little mid major who couldnt compete). then to some bigger ones like hey, im new to the big 6 school near your big 6 school, its clearly in our best interest not to fight. why dont you tell me who you want so i can steer clear? (with a suggestion that we make the arrangement long term).

its pretty sad, really, but i like to sit in my bubble and pretend it doesnt happen.

anyway, on the how would HD find out, if they have a DB of names and addresses, they could run a check on that pretty easily (not that i want them to or will suggest to seble that they do it - just hypothetically), and have a temp (or the retarded CS drone mentioned in dac's thread about who is the idiot) cross check with the list of reported aliases. i would support making that list include people playing in the same house, or on the same card, to make it clearer.

many seasons ago, I got a bunch of messages like those - and found them really annoying. How do you un-hear them? I would not promise to act on the suggested collusion, but I found that it created an awkward situation. Just took to ignoring them as best I could, but it always ended up hurting me as I tried to craft a noncollusive plan. I changed my recruiting style after that - and silence during recruiting became the fashion.

I wonder whether a lot of site mailing goes on these days. Some of the folks who suggested collusion still play and are quite successful.

i like to think most folks here are honest guys, especially the really competitive guys. i know competitive guys will cheat to win, but cheating to win in a little fun strategy game, i dont know, it just doesnt strike me as the normal personality of the people who play HD. it seems like cheating when big money is at stake is going to be rampant unless its seriously checked, but i would hope and think, when thats not the case, that people are playing for the enjoyment of strategy, and the joy/sense of pride from winning. it seems like cheating seriously diminishes those things, but i can definitely see people struggling, and then having more fun when they collude with others. kind of pathetic, yes, but im sure its out there. i just hope its mostly on a smaller scale, with most infractions much more benevolent than drafting or total collusion between two teams (recruiting as a team)., and hopefully, not from the top coaches (as they would be taking a lot more away from everyone else - guy with 3 titles who cheated basically cheated the collective out of 3 titles. its just as morally wrong to cheat at a d1 mid major, but if you are still just making the NT half the time, then you are cheating the collective out of some early NT exits - which doesnt hurt the community as badly).

i am curious though, if people, especially people new to a world who wouldnt be well known in cheating circles as non-cheaters, get collusive sitemails? anyone care to speak to that, either way?

Posted by tbird9423 on 5/1/2013 12:29:00 AM (view original):One thing I know is a cheater often thinks he isn't a cheater. I cuss the people that run red lights and then drive 10 over the speed limit all day.

It's hard for me to analyze in a vacuum, but its your thread. Yes, Wis needs to do a better job of enforcing rules and yes Wis needs to do a better job of having rules. We could all police better by becoming "rats" and sending in every email that appears to be collusion. But we're talking about a database here. The one thing that will be relatively easy (except for the strange exception) is finding out who is controlling what teams. If someone responds that they are playing with a household member, than that should be posted because no matter what anyone says, there is going to be at least some negative perception around that and people should be able to choose to avoid that if they so wish.
I guess I like combining all the ideas together and if someone wants to have one team they access from work with their girlfriend's credit card and another from their parents/kids house with their credit card, etc, etc then let them have the success that comes with that. That is probably the same guy who spends all day talking about how he made it to the final four in a fantasy game and is probably good for our society to let him have that little victory. Maybe its one less beating for his wife, kid or the family pet.

"Maybe it's one less beating for his wife, kid or the family pet"? Seriously? That is just about the most bizarre line I've seen in these threads in quite some time. Not beating his wife because he won a fantasy basketball game? Man, that is really out there. Do you even believe the things you post, or are you just trying to get a rise out of people? That's about as far out to left field as you can get, practically in the nose bleed seats. In fact, it's a little sick in the head to even suggest something like that.